tv Martin Bashir MSNBC September 8, 2011 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
continuation of the payroll tax cut that we passed in the 2010 tax deal. a tax cut for employers who hire new workers. a continuation of the expanded unemployment benefits in place right now. infrastructure investment and state and local aid. the exact price tag? we don't know, but it is expected to be around 4$400 billion, so is that it? is that big? when folks in washington talk about going big, they are meaning politically, because they want to know if obama will inspire america, and change the conversation and restore luster to the presidency. i'm interested in a different question. is it going to be enough, not politically, but economically? there are three ways to think about the economic objective that the president is trying to achieve in the jobs plan, one possible aim is that he is not trying to get us out of the hole we are in. that is a big aim. and another is that he could bring the unemployment down by a little bit. that is not easy, but perhaps
more achievable, and finally, he could simply try to do no harm. and now the biggest of the objectives, getting out of the hole. the biggest thing is to measure the hole which is to figure out how tall the ladder should be, and that is figure out when employment was healthy and demand was healthy. this is called the outputp ga and it is depressing. because next year it is likely in the $700 billion, and to get out of that you need $700 billion new demand in the economy. the second possible objective is to get the unemployment down a little bit. that would be good and improvement over things are going now, and the way to think about that is that there is a rulef of thumb out there called okin's law, and to get a unemployment down by a percentage or so, you need three percentage points of growth. we have had this calculated to be getting unemployment down by one percent would require $400 billion in pure effective
stimulus which is more than the original stimulus delivered in any year of the existence. the final possibility and the least inspiring is to simply do no harm. if the current law does not change and the current payroll tax cut and the unemployment benefits, programs will expire. mark zandi estimates this is going to cut off 1.7% of next year's expected gdp growth, 1.7%. to keep it from happening we need to extend $200 billion in federal supports, so putting it all together, and putting it next to what the president's plan is expected to look like, you will see that he is going to propose something beyond treading water and a bit beneath doing no harm and beneath between the unemployment rate, and we won't get near filling the hole. that is what the president is to propose, but what are the republicans to say? no. what they always say. they are going to say no to
almost all of it in fact which means we are beneath the do no harm scenario if they have their way which means we do harm, and not just to the jobless or the economy, but to the deficit, too. in fact, you heard that sentiment come up this morning at the first meeting of the deficit-focused super committee. take a listen. >> the national debt is 14$14.7 trillion and also a jobs deficit, and we cannot fix our budget without fixing jobs and we can't fix jobs without fixing the budget. >> and let's be very clear here. obama's leverage right now is not tonight's speech, and it is not a speech at all, and the speeches don't work that way in american politics and a talisman's drama does not work in the real world, but he does have leverage through the super committee and obama could say he will veto any recommendations that the super committee offers on jobs and if he does that, then congress would have a choice to make and would they
set off the trigger and lob $600 billion off of the pentagon's funding and another $600 billion off of education and roads? nobody wants that. or should they do what they need to be doing which is more on jobs. joining me is chris van hollen, a member of the super committee, and congressman, thank you so much for being here. >> ezra, good to be with you. >> so what about it, congressman, what if the president said he would not sign any legislation coming out of the super committee that does not require action on jobs, what would the response be? >> i do not know what the response would be immediately, but i do believe that the super committee or the so-called joint committee has to make jobs part of the mandate. i said it in the opening statement today and made the points that you have emphasized here which is that the best way to deal with our deficit in the short term is to get people back to work and get the economy moving again, and you can deal with that in the context of long-term deficit reduction, but not only do nothing to hurt the fragile economy in the short
term, but there are things that we can do to give it a little bit of a boost, and we should be doing that. >> and you know what, it is worth defining what the super committee has and the power it has, because it is a procedural advantage and the super committee is a committee that once it agrees on a proposal if it indeed does, that proposal cannot be filibustered and amended and backed up by the trigger and in effect, what we have made happen here is that it is much easier to pass the deficit reduction than here in the uncountry, and we have not given the jobs the same types of procedural advantages and is that a fair enough way of explaining it? >> yes, but the fact that the super committee has the power to do anything it wants within the package. i would argue in fact putting people back to work making sure that we generate and create more jobs is part of a deficit reduction mandate. and again, you have to look at this over the space of time. but you are right bt the procedural advantage. this is a what we call the
fast-track propostal. it is used with the respect to closing the military bases around the country which is always difficult politically and the idea is that you put all of that plan in one place, and have a up or down vote, and that is what it will be and again, the committee is not limited to simply cutting for example, and we have made it very clear because of deficit reduction done in a balanced way nor prohibitive in any way to say that part of the strategy for reducing the deficit is to get the economy moving more quickly and getting more people back to work. >> and this morning in the opening statements, representative hensarling made the point that deficit reduction was itself a jobs program and you didn't need more action for short-term support because if you reduced the long-term deficit is enough. is that enough for the democrats on the committee? >> no, it is not enough. look, we all recognize that in the short term especially for example just cutting some of the republican colleagues have proposed is actually counter
productive and not just me saying that, but the chairman of the federal reserve, chairman bernanke saying that the deep cuts would hurt the economy and even the bipartisan commissions, you know, simpson, bowles, reid and deminchey say that the long deficit plans should be look ed at the long term view. the longer the economy is stalled a on the longer people are hurting and out of work but the worse the deficit gets and a big part of the current deficit that we are facing right now is due to the fact that we have been in this sluggish economy, so let's get that going now, and that is not enough to deal with the deficit in the longer term, and youused to do other things, but when you deal with the deficit, you don't want a glide path landing, but a crash landing. >> yes, that is right. i can't think of too many
alternative scenarios there. and tonight, what are you hoping to hear from the president? what is helpful to you and your work? >> well, he has to lay out the vision of where the country needs to be on jobs. from what we have heard, it is going to have a lot of very important elements to it, and he has to make it clear and with, you know, with conviction that has been taken on this and other issues that he is planting a flag in the ground on this issue, and this is the conversation that america needs to have and he is going to be engaged in the country in this way. the only thing that i would add to the elements that you talked about earlier, ezra, is the whole housing issue which may not be a big part of the president's speech, because a lot of the decisions in that area are not within his control and under the control of the fannie mae and freddie mac conservatorship, and if you were able to give a lot of the people who were current on the mortgages, but under water the
same financing rates that others have in this marketplace, that could give a considerable boost of what the president may be looking about tonight and above the particular dollars and size of the package that you were talking about. >> right. >> and it could save the federal government money with foreclosures and those people backing up their mortgages. >> yes, that is exactly right. and the in terms of the impact on the economy that could be a very important piece of it and again, it is not totally within the white house control, but part tof the conversation and i really hope that decision is going to be made going forward. >> representative chris van holl hollen, thank you for joining us. >> thank you, ezra. win one for the gipper? ronald reagan walked away with his own debate last night. you saved us a lot of money on auto insurance. i used that money to buy a falcon. ergo, you bought me a falcon. i should've got a falcon. most people who switch to state farm save on average about $480.
what they do with it, well, that's their business. oh, that explains a lot, actually. [ chuckles ] [ male announcer ] another reason people switch to state farm. aw, i could've gotten a falcon. [ male announcer ] get to a better state. [ falcon screeches ] helps defends against occasional constipation, diarrhea, gas and bloating. with three strains of good bacteria to help balance your colon. you had me at "probiotic." [ female announcer ] phillips' colon health.
you had me at "probiotic." possibilities are everywhere. multiply them with the premier rewards gold card from american express. with triple membership rewards points on airfare, double on gas, double on groceries, and a single point on everthing else, it's a fast way to earn more every day. plus, you can earn 10,000 bonus points. and the annual fee the first year is on us. call 800.axp.gold to apply.
welcome back. there is no doubt who won last night's republican presidential debate and it was not mitt romney or rick perry, it was ronald reagan. >> ronald reagan made a deal -- >> president reagan when he made the decision back in 1987, he saw this as a human issue. >> ronald reagan. >> are we standing in the reagan tradition -- >> under ronald reagan we would have 3,700,000 americans working. >> i strongly supported ronald reagan. >> under president reagan, we would have 12 million more jobs out there. >> in regan they trust. he got name-checked 48 times in last night's debate. but the funny thing is that if the actual ronald reagan had been there on the stage defending his actual record he would have certainly lost and been destroyed. the real ronald reagan was a conservative and no doubt about
that, but he was also a pragmatist and after cutting taxes dramatically in 1981 only to see the deficits rise simi r similarly in 1982, reagan began raising taxes, and then he signed a tax increase to wipe out one-third of the tax break, and then he added a gasoline x tax, and then a year after that another $50 billion tax hike. all in all, he raised taxes four times to tamp down the deficits. compared to what we heard on the stage last night, which we will get to in a moment, remember there was the tax reform act of 1986, and when william niskin, reagan's adviser said walter mondale would have been proud. and then the social security reforms, that was added to make the system more solvent, and last night, that compromise was not on the table. >> at the previous debate, everyone on stage raised their hand to say they would, and i
want to get this exactly right, not have accepted a debt deal that included $10 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases. >> i join my fellow participants here. what we should have been looking at is a way to get the spending under control, and capping it, cutting it, and getting a balanced budget amendment. >> oh, and under reagan, the federal government's payroll rose by 61,000, and by come parison under clinton they fell by 370,000. and imagine reagan defending that record before the onslaught last night, it would have been very, very tough, but i want to be very, very clear, my point is not to suggest that reagan was some closet liberal. he wasn't. he signed a huge tax cut and governed in a deeply conservative fashion, but my point is simply to say that reagan was the type of conservative willing to make an accommodation with reality and compromise with the circumstances that he found himself in. that is not something that i heard a lot of on the stage last
night, but maybe i had it wrong. joining us now is reince priebus chairman of the rnc and thank you for being here. >> thank you. >> and is this some of the games that we saw in the 2006 debates where they said they would not make compromises and then governed by come promices? >> well, it is a debate within the republican party of the candidates, and these are issues that are really important. we have deficits and i heard the introduction, but we have deficits right now as you know that are just coming out of the eyeballs and we have $14.7 trillion and we have -- excuse ne this deb me in the debt, and a president who said he would cut it in half by the first term, and then he introduced the biggest stimulus in the history of america and in the speech today, and i know you are talking about the debate, but the problem is that the
americans are glazed over with these speeches and this talk and now a joint session and now we are going to have another 45 minutes on television, and i think that they have had it. i agree with at least the premise that you are getting to that people, that americans do want to see both sides working together, but the problem that we have is that i think that we have a president who is the classic community organizer who can bring people together in a room -- >> well, i -- >> and he needs to be specific. >> well, there are a lot of specifics on the table and we will see more here, but it is clear to everybody all along and he has put specific plans on the table as of april and we have a big deficit -- >> and went down to zero and not a single democrat supported that. >> and when you have big deficits and this is what reagan showed when you have a big deficit, you raise taxes and that is how you solve it, and how the federal reserve tells us
to solve ate and the big banks and that is how we have solved the big deficits in the history of the country, and the question is not whether we have a huge debt question, because we clearly do, but why unlike past presidents there is unwillingness to use all of the tools in the tool kit to solve it? >> well, the reason that we are in the debate to begin with and the reason that we are having deficits at $14.7 trillion which is a world away from what we were going through 30 years ago and let's just talk about today and the problem we have is not the fact that washington does not have enough money in the door, and i think that we have a fundamental disagreement in that i think that higher taxes should be off of the table, and most americans agree with me that higher taxes should be off of the table, because the problem that we have in this country and that is that washington is in love with spending and we can't stop spending, you know. obamacare at $2.5 trillion is a
down payment, and a stimulus of $825 billion, that didn't improve the job market in this country and made things worse -- >> let me jump in a couple of things. the obama care was scored under $1 trillion and -- >> i have read your columns. >> and that your party successfully ran against in the last election and the democrats -- >> and there is no rating -- >> and not that we have overly high revenues given the spending, but over the last five years the taxes have fallen, ten years, sorry, taxes fall under 5% of the gdp and spending rise little over 5% gdp, but we have a taxing and spending problem and the thing they don't quite understand on this is that we passed large tax cuts in the surplus and we had a surplus to give the money back to the american people, and we are now in the opposite situation, but what i never sort of hear uttered here is the opposite policy. democrats will say to cut the
spending, and we are in that situation that we don't have more money to spend, but taxes need to be part of that conversation, too. >> well, here is the thing, most americans here in this country believe that we are in a fundamental battle for freedom in america, and what i mean by that is that we are in a battle between government's insatiable appetite to grow and that means when my little guy jack, 6, is my age, it is going to cost 45 cents on every dollar made in america just to run the federal government, and i think that the big problem that we have in country is that we've not had the fortitude in washington, and i don't think that there is one side to blame, but we haven't had the fortitude in washington until right now to have this battle to talk about what we are going to do in america to cut the size of government so that we are not in 20 or 30 years spending more of our money that we make just to run the federal government than the money that we put in our pocket. that is a fundamental freedom we
are worth having. >> and that is a philosophical difference, and that is a fair point. if we should have higher taxes and less spending, that is fair, but it is coming from the long term of aging and health care. and in health care, there is a push against the most types of the health care cost tron tocon you can guess outside of what paul ryan wants to do and on the short term, we have to cut spending, but as ryan said, you can't do that much on the entitlements in the short term and that is why he kept all of the affordable medicare cuts over the next ten years, so we have a longer-term argument over what the shape of the federal government needs to be, but a shorter term need to come to a pragmatic solution to have the gang of six or the simpson/bowles or for that matter deminchey/ridlin.
>> well, we are going to be working together, and regardless of your issue of the debts and the deficits and the reality is that because i know you understand this very well, and the waste and the fraud and the abuse, we can get our arms around that, but until we are at a place where are the democrats are willing to look at things like the paul ryan plan and dealing with the long term effects of medicare and medicaid and other fiscal plans to have a better way to deliver the programs to save us money down the line in the 10- 20-year level, and all of the things like corporate jets and all of that is interesting things and you know, the republicans and speaker boehner have been at the table on those issues, but they are not going to really solve the monstrosity of the debt that is facing america, and you know what, people know that that are watching this program. they know that.
>> and chairman priebus, i have to get us out to go to commercial, but we can continue this another day. i appreciate your coming on today and i hope we get to talk about it again. >> i look forward to it. >> coming up next do, you think that the world revolves around you? it is weird science at the reagan debate. stick with us. and omega-rich nutrition for that shiny coat. ever think healthy could taste so good? [ woman announcing ] new beneful healthy fiesta. her morning begins with arthritis pain. that's a coffee and two pills. the afternoon tour begins with more pain and more pills. the evening guests arrive. back to sore knees. back to more pills. the day is done but hang on... her doctor recommended aleve. just 2 pills can keep arthritis pain away all day with fewer pills than tylenol. this is lara who chose 2 aleve and fewer pills for a day free of pain. and get the all day pain relief of aleve in liquid gels.
welcome back. so the big winner at last night's debate is ronald reagan and we have been through it. but the big loser, this guy. galileo gallay. handsome man. he is thes as as as a astrono how did he end up in the 2011 presidential debate among the republicans? well, it was in the discussion surrounding the arguably unsettled science of climate
change, of course. take it away, governor rick perry. >> the idea that we would put americans' economy at jeopardy based on scientific theory that is not settled yet to me is just nonsense. i mean it -- and i tell somebody just because you have a group of scientists who have stood up to say, here is the fact. galileo got outvoted for a spell. >> let's be clear on what happened to galileo. galileo was offering a new theory based on rigorous scientific evidence and shouted down by faith-based id logs weo who did not want to understand his views. this is not the way it cuts to climate change as rick perry thinks. you don't think that galileo was the biggest loser? think someone else did? follow us on twitter @bashirlive
or you can find me on twitter @ezrakline. technology. [ male announcer ] new bengay cold therapy. the same technology used by physical therapists. go to bengay.com for a 5-dollar coupon. i'm not looking forward to my flight. try this. bayer aspirin? i'm not having a heart attack. it's my back. no, this is new bayer advanced aspirin... clinically proven to relieve tough pain twice as fast as before. what, did you invent this or something? well, my team did. i'm dr. eric first, from bayer. wow. look. it has microparticles. it enters the bloodstream faster and rushes relief right to the site of pain. better? great! thanks. [ male announcer ] new bayer advanced aspirin. extra strength pain relief. twice as fast. test our fast relief. look out for your coupon in this sunday's papers. with professional-grade research. and some of the most powerful, yet easy to use trading tools on the planet.
with two children and no way to support them. i put myself through nursing school, and then i decided to go get a doctorate degree. university of phoenix gave me the knowledge to make a difference in people's lives. my name is dr. kimberly horton. i manage a network of over a thousand nurses, and i am a phoenix. [ male announcer ] university of phoenix is proud to sponsor education nation.
because we believe an educated world is a better world. everyone always wants to slap a big narrative on presidential debates. romney versus perry, the fall of michele bachmann and the irrelevance of ron paul, but as often, debates are collections of interesting moments that may or may not end up mattering in the campaign or tell us something profound for candidates. to go through some of the highlights is michelle cottle of the daily beast and newsweek. one thing, michelle, that a lot of folks enjoyed about it, because you felt like you were watching a real campaign here is the clash between mitt romney and rick perry and when they got down into it in jobs they had a funny mirror image of one another. take a listen. >> michael dukakis created jobs three times faster than you did,
mitt. >> well, as a matter of fact, george bush and his predecessor created jobs at a faster rate than you did, governor. >> i kept thinking while watching that in other contexts these guys kept saying that the government cannot create any jobs, but when it comes to the records in massachusetts and texas, when they are running the government, it can create tons of jobs and magic job machine. >> yes, so true, and governor huntsman jumped in talking about how utah whipped both of their butts. it is a great context because you can make the numbers say whatever you want them to say. >> and michele bachmann had a more, i think -- more of an argument that i felt like moderatists were not treating as terribly serious proposal. she felt we could get down the $2 gas. >> don't forget that the day that president obama took office gasoline was $1.79 a gallon.
it is entirely possible for us to get back to inexpensive energy, but the problem is that energy is too high. let's have a goal of bringing it down. >> and what i thought was fascinating about the way they reacted to that was that nobody seemed to quite feel the need to compete with her, and saying, no, $1.50 or no, i will get down to a nickel. none of that happened. they said it is representative bachmann and is her campaign sputtering out a little bit? >> last night, she is the one who needed to kind of make a stand, you know. she had been fading in the public eye with perry entering the race, and she really needed to show a little leg and get people paying attention to her again last night and her performance was weaker than in some past campaigns, but i don't think that she knew what to do when confronted with kind of the x-factor of perry. >> yes, it felt like she missed having tim pawlenty up there, and she knew the role. >> yes, it was so much clearer when tim was the boring guy, and you know, you were the tea party
favorite. >> but there was another moment in the debate that i found the oddest personally to take when rick perry was asked about the record of executions in texas. i want you to hear that clip, but in particular the audience response to it. >> your state has executed 234 death row inmates more than any other governor in modern times. [ applause ] have you struggled to sleep at night with the idea that any one of those might have been innocent? >> no, sir, i have never struggled with that at all. >> that got more applause than when perry mentioned the killing of osama bin laden number one, and that is one contrast worth making, but the other thing about it is that it is a judicial system, and as rick perry knows that the judicial system is run by the government and rick perry doesn't think that government can do much right, and there is a sort of something watching him of life and death that evening that he
said that he errs on the side of saving lives and he was unconflicted about it that i found unsettling. >> well, perry has had specific ugly questions come up about whether the state has executed some innocent men. >> right. >> and so he had to kind of be bracing for this, and i think that for the audience he is shooting for, and no pun intended, you have to be kind of stick by your guns out, you know, decisive and no, it is all okay, and what we have done is okay and all a matter of justice. he cannot afford to show wiggle room, and as the crowd showed he is attuned with a segment of the base there, and even if romney is looking stronger on points of the strategy, rick has them by the heart. >> it is good politics if not necessarily wise or judicious. there is a lighter moment, too, when newt gingrich was asked about writing a forward which he did for perry's book. >> you wrote the forward to rick
perry's most recent book called "fed up" and you called him quote, uniquely qualified to explain what is taking place with the economy." does that mean in terms of job creation kree den sha creation credentials at a proxy like this? >> no, it means if he wants to write another book, i will write another forward. look, he said himself, that is an interesting book of ideas for someone who is not proposing for someone running for president, and to pick it apart is silly. >> i think it is odd for newt gingrich to say that taking books that he writes forwards to is i is silly or is he saying that i would like to be secretary of health and human services under president rick perry? >> well, nobody is telling us that he is uniquely qualified to tell us anything but newt gingrich and that is what we take away from any discussion that he is involved in.
>> and yes, i guess that actually is often what newt gingrich is telling us. >> yes. >> that is what the entire presidential campaign is about, and nothing other than look at me, i'm newt gingrich. >> and romney had some of the most impressive or presidential moment of the night, and he was asked about the hp vaccine and everybody was lining up to take shots of perry who argued that every female school child in texas should be given the vaccination, and he pulled the punch. >> i believe in parental rights and parental responsibility for the kids. my guess is that the governor perry would like to do it a different way. second time through, we have each taken a mulligan or two, and i agree with those who said he went about it the wrong way, but the heart was in the right place. >> for this last question, i want to bring in jonathan alter who joins us now, msnbc analyst. jonathan, that was a wise moment
for romney, because he seemed presidential. >> yes, he did fine on that answer, and he would do it differently if he had to do it over again, but there are a lot of more moderate people who he needs to reach out to who may have thought that he was right on that answer, but i'm not sure how many of those folks are in the republican party, the folks who would support the original policy. and that is an issue that can be although it is a very, you know, important one in the context of texas politics, and potentially in another election year, it might be important in presidential election, but this year, it is second, third, fourth tier compared to the economy and other top tier issues. >> yes, that seems right. before we go here, michelle and jonathan, who did themselves the most good in the debate? >> well, i think that rick perry had to prove he was not going to shoot himself in the foot first time out, so he cleared that hurdle. >> john? >> i don't think so. i think that perry hurt himself,
because he doubled down on social security and this ponzi scheme business. florida has a lot of elderly republican voters who are very supportive of social security and medicare who are going to be voting in their primary and that is going to be a problem down the road. >> jonathan alter and michelle cottle, thank you very much for joining me. >> thank you, ezra. >> coming up next, fires in texas, and wet weather up and down the east? mother nature sure is in a foul mood. ♪ i just want to be okay today - ♪ i just want to know today - [ whistles ] ♪ know today, know today - [ cat meows ] - ♪ know that maybe i will be okay ♪ [ chimes ] travelers can help you protect the things you care about... and save money with multi-policy discounts. are you getting the coverage you need... and the discounts you deserve? for an agent or quote, call 800-my-coverage... or visit travelers.com. is best absorbed in small continuous amounts.
for the efficient absorption my body needs. over time, my lashes thinned. after 40, i didn't have enough lashes. i'd heard of latisse® but had questions. my doctor said... latisse® is the only fda approved prescription treatment for inadequate or not enough lashes. now with latisse® my lashes are longer, darker, with more than double the fullness in 16 weeks. if you are using or have used, prescription products for eye pressure problems, use latisse® under close doctor care. latisse® use may cause increased brown pigmentation of the colored part of the eye which is likely permanent. eyelid skin darkening may occur which may be reversible.
if you experience eye problems or have eye surgery, consult your doctor. common side effects include itchy eyes and eye redness. i trust latisse® and i use it too. my lashes changed as i got older. now i use latisse®. more than double the fullness in 16 weeks. are your lashes thinning as you get older? why wait? ask your doctor about latisse® from allergan, a company with 60 years of eye care expertise. welcome back. veronica de la cruz is in the newsroom with developing stories. >> all right. ezra, we will get started here in central texas where firefighters are battling to get the wildfires under control for days now. two deaths are blamed on the wildfires which have destroyed 1,400 homes. this is the most destructive of the 170 fires that have erupted over the state. and this week, heavy rains and flooding are battering the east coast, and a stalled
weather front mixed with the remnants of tropical storm lee dumping 7 to 10 inches of rain on already waterlogged rain into today. flooding reported all up and down the eastern seaboard. we will keep track of all of these situations and continue to update you. >> thank you, veronica. and coming up next the hour draws near for president obama, and we get serious about the expectations game. just one phillips' colon health probiotic cap a day
helps defends against occasional constipation, diarrhea, gas and bloating. with three strains of good bacteria to help balance your colon. you had me at "probiotic." [ female announcer ] phillips' colon health. and form a layer called biofilm so strong it survives brushing. thankfully, there's listerine® antiseptic. its triple-action formula penetrates biofilm, kills germs and protects your mouth for hours. fight biofilm with listerine®.
good afternoon, i'm sal wapner with the cnbc market wrap. right after the fed chairman speech did not give specifics of how the economy could be helped off of the worst possible averages, the dow is still down 80 points. as we wait for the president's speech on jobs, there is an uptick of those seeking unemployed benefits.
the number of applicants is 14,000. and the story is not much better be i the self-employed because their numbers have fallen from 2 mi million since december of 2006, which is another sign that the economy is struggling to gain traction. that is cnbc market wrap, and i'm scott wapner. if i were a speechwriter, i would be nervous right now. people don't want a another speech, but a galvanizing speech to whack the other members of congress, and doing that is impossible. the legislators that come from the republican districts have to
worry about a tea party district. so the people that are thinking about it, are not the people the president can convince. so what if the speech succeeds what can it do? here is my friend and washington post colleague e.j. if it succeeds, what does it look like to you? >> i think that the republican party has been obsessed with the fight of whether you go for the base or the center, and i think that there are a whole lot of ideas that appeal to the political center and the political base, and few of which you will hear tonight. my hunch is that speech will be better than i thought it would be which means a lot of stuff nit. we need to do a lot as you saw at the break with the economic uncertainty out there.
>> the fact to spend $25 billion to repair schools over the next 15 months most nonideological americans with kids say, yeah, good idea. my school could use that, and that is a idea where you win the political fight and maybe an outside chance of winning the fight in congress. i agree with you that the pressure on the republicans to vote no on that, and it is to vote no on another idea that we will hear is to prevent teacher layoffs otr lr layoffs of the f responders and that is where the electorate or the clearly the base are on the same side, and some of the ideas have a shot of getting support from the other side, but the situation is terrible, because you have a much, much more extreme republican party. >> i hear that and i say, you are right, these ideas will poll well, and you are right, because we have ideas that are going to poll more to which the taxing the rich which pulls the majority support among the republicans, so i'm in a weird
situation, because i'm a policy guy and i sit and count tax cuts as i go to sleep, but i'm waiting to -- >> count the tax increases before you go to sleep. >> yes, that, too. but i'm waiting to hear a process argument tonight like i will not sign anything from the super committee that does not include jobs and something that is different going forward and even if if the ideas poll well, the political system cannot think about the next week or month. >> well, first of all, you go on that and i like it very much, because one of the things that obama desperately because i thi of the things obama particularly used to do, again, both for the base and for the center, look strong and look like he stands for something. i think when you're looking at these declining numbers since the awful debt ceiling fight, i think a lot of that was about strength and i think a threat like that, i'm not going to side any cuts unless you do something about job, again, i think would be popular in general and certainly play well with the
base, but also say, hey, the guy stands for something, and i think people are desperate to see him stand for something. >> you know this because you work in the media. i work in the media. we work for "the washington post." what gets covered over a period of time, the speech, a story in the paper a day or two. what gets covered, an ongoing battle, a point of conflict with the deadline and new developments day by day. i worry with the speech it can sort of disappear. if you don't have something that's actually putting it into some type of procedural form, it can go away. even if popular, there's not a lot given to it and you have to think about things in that leverage. the reality, people successful changing conversation in the last year or two have been republicans who have understood even if they can't get a prime time speech to a joint members of congress like obama can, using their leverage, they can change the national conversation. that's actually a lesson the
obama administration could learn from. >> or learn to get out of the habit of preeminent son sessions. totally right. one of the reasons why we can't just look at the speech tonight is a lot will depend on what he does with it afterwards. for example, the cut in the payroll tax. keep it going for a year. a spectacular issue politically and the right thing to do to say over and over, you want to cut taxes on the very rich but will block a tax cut for middle income people, over 100 million of them? to do that over and over again, same on fixing the schools, same on hiring first responders. a lot depends not just on how eloquent he is tonight but how much stick-to-itiveness does he have and say, i'm sure we'll work a deal. people want things done. >> the concern about a speech like this, whatever barack obama comes out and proposes becomes democrat plan, the left plan. i always think of the fran structure plan.
it has the afl-cio and the chamber of congress. this is a no brainer. a moment, high construction, unemployment. cheap materials, borrow for almost nothing, infrastructure, it's falling apart. we fwleed a better infrastructure to compete in this company economy and the two biggest interest groups on the two main sides. it can't get done. i keep looking at that saying, if the afl-cio and chamber of commerce can't partner to do something so obvious for the economy, then this town is not working the way people thought it worked. >> i've actually thought obama should come out and propose eliminating taxes on the rich and then the republicans would raise them. i mean, it's really gotten to that point. and dead right on infrastructure. it's conservative republicans have always supported. i don't support the transfer programs, but, yes, government should build, improve roads and bridges, and maybe there you're going to see some progress,
because still some of the old-fashioned republicans who like to build roads and bridges, some are still around. >> right. e.j. of "the washington post," thank you. pleasure to see you. and tomorrow, a special programming note. be sure to join us as we mark the anniversary of september 11th. we'll be joined by tom brokaw along with the family members and victims who looked back at the morning that changed everything. we hope you'll tune in for it. [ carrie ] i remember my very first year as a teacher, setting that goal to become a principal. but, i have to support my family, so how do i go back to school? university of phoenix made it doable. i wouldn't be where i am without that degree. my name is dr. carrie buck. i helped turn an at risk school into an award winning school, and i am a phoenix. [ male announcer ] university of phoenix is proud to sponsor education nation. because we believe an educated world is a better world.
whose non-stop day starts with back pain... and a choice. take advil now and maybe up to four in a day. or choose aleve and two pills for a day free of pain. way to go, coach. ♪ time now to "clear the air." the most important jobs speech this month wasn't the one mitt romney delivered earlier this week. to be honest despite the attention we've lavished on it during the show it night be the one president obama is planning to give tonight. rather, the talk charles evans just gave in london. never heard of him? you're not alone. president of the chicago federal reserve and as such one of the ten members of federal reserves powerful market committees. you don't hear about them much. they set the bank's policy and
right now the federal reserve has a lot more power and room than the president or any presidential candidate to address the jobs crisis. the only problem, they're not doing it. in fact, as evans puts it, the federal reserve has "left its policy on hold." that, he says, is a mistake borne of an institution overly afraid of inflation and not afraid enough of prolonged unemployment. in his speech evans reminded colleagues "the federal reserve act charges us with maintaining monetary and financial conditions that support maximum employment and price stability. i know that sounds how shely boring, by force of law the federal reserve has to worry about inflation and employment. both. not just inflation." as evans noted, that man ditt is what congress told it to do. didn't decide not to the. he continues "the most reasonable interpretation of our maximum employment objective is an unemployment rate near 6%. so when unemployment stands at 9% we're missing on our
employment mandate by three full percentage points. that's just as bad as a 5% target. so if 5% inflation would have our hair on fire, so should 9% unemployment." if ben bernanke slirlistening a his hair catching fire that could mean more than any other politician saying things in this country combined. let's hope he's out there and beginning to smell the smoke. thank you for watching. dylan ratigan picks things up from here. what you got? >> thank you so much. as you're so often aware, the show begins right now. well, the big story today, we are back. the house and senate are in session. we're, of course, back here at the "d.r. show "and most importantly the president is back on the hill convening his fifth address to a